NYPD has appropriately clarified guidelines for officers regarding photography.

The new guidelines make it clear that "photography and the videotaping of public places, buildings and structures are common activities within New York City. Given the City's prominence as a tourist destination, practically all such photography will have no connection to terrorism or unlawful conduct...."

The guidelines go on to clarify issues around viewing images or demanding deletion stating "Members of the service may not demand to view photographs taken by a person absent consent or exigent circumstances..... In addition, a person who has taken photographs should not be directed to delete or destroy images in stored within the device."




Eric Bowles
Nikonians Team
My Gallery

Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera

Eric:

A step in the right direction ... sanity prevails!

Thanks for posting this.

Regards,

HBB in Phoenix, Arizona
Nikonian Team Member

Go here for a list of membership upgrade benefits.

Photography is a journey with no conceivable destination.

Thanks Eric. I'm going to be in NYC in July, so I printed a copy of this to carry in my camera bag.

Gary in SE Michigan, USA. Co-organizer of the Southern Michigan Chapter
Nikonians membership - My most important photographic investment, after the camera.
D4, D800e, D300, D90, F6, FM3a (black), FM2n (chrome)
YashicaMat 124, Graflex Speed Graphic 4x5
My Nikonians Gallery & Our Chapter Gallery

Good plan. I don't know what the rules are in Boston, but I was told by a transit worker I wasn't allowed to take photographs in the stations. (I'd just taken one, but wasn't asked to delete it.)

Randy

Well it is about time they got around to actually clarifying people rights in the matter. Now some of the othe major cities need to follow suit.

I shoot therefore, Iam.
http://joves.smugmug.com

Transit authorities have additional issues, like not blinding on coming train operators, getting licensing fees for use of the facilities, and in such a confined space and close proximity to users there could be privacy issues of the riders waiting for the train.

As has been posted before, use some common sense and the representative of the authority, even if proven wrong later, still sets the immediate rules.

If I were a terroist, I would buy a post card or go the the local public libriary and use their computer to access Google Earth street level images.

George
My Nikonian Galleries

does anybody know of anything like this in San Francisco?

>does anybody know of anything like this in San Francisco?

I have never had a problem photographing anything in San Francisco.

Hope someone from U.K. and France police forces reads this....

S, S Brass, S2,S2 BD, F, F Black, FTn, F36, F250 Black, F2 Black, F2A, F2AS Black, F3/T Champagne, F3/T Black, F3P, FG Black, FM2/T, 35TI, 28TI, F4e, F5, D2H, D200... Two Bessa R2S NHS!

Others take pictures, Nikon takes Life with you!

Remember, the World is Analog!!!

My Nikonians Gallery
My Flickr Gallery

I just got lit upon by a police officer and a bailiff in Raleigh, NC, last week for taking photos of the Wake County Courthouse. It seems that it was a suspicious act on my part! These people actually saw me taking photos outside the building while they were inside. They came running out of the courthouse to confront me. The cop made me delete the photos I took. Fortunately, she didn't know that I had taken others from a different angle, and I kept them (and am posting one now because I guess I am rebel). When she asked me what I was doing and why, I said, "Taking pictures. Because I want to."

It seems that wasn't the proper response.

But, to be fair to her, she did have a sense of humor. When I asked if I could take a photo of the Federal Building, she said that she wouldn't--she said they have snipers posted on the roof, just waiting for photographers. I THINK she was kidding.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Melinda

Visit my Gallery: http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/ppuser/181777/cat/500

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Attachment #1, (jpg file)

>I just got lit upon by a police officer and a bailiff in
>Raleigh, NC, last week for taking photos of the Wake County
>Courthouse. It seems that it was a suspicious act on my part!
>These people actually saw me taking photos outside the
>building while they were inside. They came running out of the
>courthouse to confront me. The cop made me delete the photos I
>took. Fortunately, she didn't know that I had taken others
>from a different angle, and I kept them (and am posting one
>now because I guess I am rebel). When she asked me what I was
>doing and why, I said, "Taking pictures. Because I want
>to."
>
>It seems that wasn't the proper response.
>
>But, to be fair to her, she did have a sense of humor. When I
>asked if I could take a photo of the Federal Building, she
>said that she wouldn't--she said they have snipers posted on
>the roof, just waiting for photographers. I THINK she was
>kidding.
>
>
>
>
>




I wonder if their acts toward you constitute illegal search and seizure? Your camera is your personal property. Just because you pointed it at the building doesn't mean you actually took the picture. In your case, you actually did capture an image of their courthouse. Does their public building have any special expectation of privacy? What if you would have had personal images on your CF card that would have put you in an embarrassing position? If you had images of some crime on that card, would the evidence have been supressed in court due to the officer not having probable cause to search your camera to begin with? I would contact their supervisor or local state attorney (prosecuter, or whatever they call them there)and ask him if the officer's actions were legal or not. If the officers actions were a violation of your constitutional rights, the idea would be that they don't continue making these mistakes with other people.

I was just glad she didn't make me delete/reformat the entire CF card (I have heard of others who have had to do that). I would have argued against that. I had just spent almost an hour taking photos of a demolition site across the street from the courthouse, and I would have been angry--to say the least--if I would have had to sacrifice those shots.

Fortunately, the two shots she made me delete were the most boring ones I had.

But, yes, I agree with you. It was ridiculous and demeaning. People walking by us kept staring, and I wondered if I would be arrested, or if people were thinking I was going to be. I am friends with a judge who works in that courthouse and when I told her about the incident, she was appalled. If it ever happens again, I'll get my friend to sort things out for me. But not everyone has that luxury.

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Melinda

Visit my Gallery: http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/ppuser/181777/cat/500

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I'm pretty sure it is illegal for a cop (or anyone) to demand you erase the pictures on your card without a warrant. The photos are your personal property and just like if the police want to search your house they need a warrant, if they want to search your photos they need a warrant too. At least this is what I understood from that "photographer's rights" printout that floats around the web.

The trouble of course is enforcing your rights because frankly IMO I think if you tried to go against the cop too adamantly they could easily come up with some BS excuse to arrest you (resisting an officer or being disrespectful to an officer or whatever) and then you'd be in the wrong for going against that.

Norman

Some of my pictures

So what you are saying is, "You're damned if you do, and you're damned if you don't?"

The bailiff told me, "What people like you (PEOPLE LIKE ME??? What the hell does that mean???) don't understand is, America is under greater threat of invasion than at any time since 1941."

And what that has to do with me snapping some shots of MY courthouse (I am a Wake County taxpayer) is.....????

~~~~~~~~~~~~
Melinda

Visit my Gallery: http://images.nikonians.org/galleries/showgallery.php/ppuser/181777/cat/500

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Unfortunately, you should obey the officer at the confrontation, but you might want to send a letter to the Chief Judge of the county and inquire about the court's and county's policy about taking photograph's of the county courts buildings.

Maybe you need an official looking photographer's badge to go with your camera.

In Chicago, snipers on the top of the Federal Courts building do not have clear fire lanes because of the height of the building. But it does have a underground parking facility with a very big steel barricade and it is loaded with wireless security cameras. Then there is the fact that is in a 2 block cluster of a federal office building and U.S. Post Office and there are spill over federal offices in other buildings in the area.


I always found the South very hospitable except when I was in an US Army uniform, and if I was stopped by a police office it was a night in jail to help finance the county.

George
My Nikonian Galleries

Unfortunately sometimes it certainly seems that way. Not that I have ever had personal experience with this but you can read reports about photgraphers/protesters trying to excercise their rights but when faced with security/police who are in the wrong they get arrested anyways (usually on like "probable cause" or "acting suspicious", etc.).

I feel the same way about you do re: the courthouses too. I grew up in an area with a lot of dams. You used to be able to drive across them or walk up to the navigation locks to see boats pass by or even go inside and tour the generator rooms (even to go inside a running generator itself), etc. You could go to watch the fish go up/down the fish ladder and there was a fish observation room which had a running tally of the number and species of each fish that passed by the observation window that season. All kinds of cool stuff.

Right after 9/11 they closed off all of these areas in the name of national security and have not opened them back up since. I have come to realize that they will likely never be open again. In some instances, the closing of the dam to crossing traffic presents a navigational challenge as it served as a bridge across the waterway and now you have to drive way out of your way to get across. It riles me up every time I think about it or see it because we paid for them with our taxes! Maybe I'm just biased because I did a school project on the dams when I was little and it was great fun (and we even got an extended tour of the dam facilities but now the little kids probably get the impression that dams and airports, etc. are scary places that should be feared and not be approached because they are always surrounded by big fences and warning signs and armed guards. Sometimes I wonder if there will be a shortage of civil engineers in the future because of things like this.

Norman

Some of my pictures

First, as a resident of Raleigh I can say that losing pictures of the Wake County Courthouse is no great loss. It is one of the ugliest buildings anywhere in the world. Second, if you do get forced (illegally) to delete files take the card out of your camera and do not take any more pictures on it. When you get home use some file recovery software and restore them since the camera doesn't actually delete anything but the directory entry.

This post 9/11 mindset has permeated down to the most ridiculous local levels as well. What most LEOs don't seem to understand is that anyone planning a terrorist attack is going to be covert in gathering their information. They don't want to be seen, even on the off chance that they might be interrogated. Google street view is a much greater threat to national security than any Nikonian (I hope ).

Here's another example of the madness:

Last Saturday morning, I'm working at an outlying hospital my practice covers. There is an old barn on the hospital grounds that has been a source of some interesting pictures for me in the past. To shoot the barn, you turn your back on the hospital. I'm taking a short break to grab a few pictures while the light and clouds look right.

So, I'm standing outside in broad daylight, back to the hospital, in my scrubs, wearing my ID badge taking some pictures. A hospital security officer drives by and tells me to stop what I'm doing! Does he think I'm planning a rocket attack on a 100 year old barn? I explain patiently that I'm in a public place, without any posted restrictions on access of any kind, and that I would like to continiue, please.

At this point he says I must cease and desist immediately and give him the memory cards I have in my possession. For me, that was it. I told him that he was getting nothing from me and that I was going back to work and where he could find me. I told him he would have to arrest and cuff me to get any of my gear and that he would have to chase me into the hospital lobby to do so. I then told him to leave me alone and went back to work.

Never in my entire life have I said a disrespectful or confrontational word to a cop, but this time.....sheesh!

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>>>
>At this point he says I must cease and desist immediately and
>give him the memory cards I have in my possession. For me,
>that was it. I told him that he was getting nothing from me
>and that I was going back to work and where he could find me.
>I told him he would have to arrest and cuff me to get any of
>my gear and that he would have to chase me into the hospital
>lobby to do so. I then told him to leave me alone and went
>back to work.
>
>Never in my entire life have I said a disrespectful or
>confrontational word to a cop, but this time.....sheesh!

I am so proud of you. Tell these people to go pound sand. In the Land of the Free, the Brave will have to stand up for their rights.

I do not think a terrorist would blowup a hospital. Now they might take certain diagnostic and treatment compounds with a long half life and use them.

The unfortunate thing is that security guard may not be paid well, may not be well educated, and has a very difficult job dealing with people under a great deal of personal or professional stress and expected to put his/her personal problems aside from his/her job. You might know why the security guard was concerned about what you were doing.

My father worked at a V. A. hospital and needed a Top Secret clearance as did the residents in his training program. Not something most doctors need.

George
My Nikonian Galleries

Hey Melinda, good to see you post, haven't stumbled over any of your posts lately. OMG what does this mean for things like the Scott Kelby World Wide Photo Walk this Saturday? I will be at the Cary one as the Raleigh one was full. (Later found out they can accommodate overflow).

As I read about what is happening in NY and Chicago, I smiled thinking, "Thank God I am down in Raleigh where this doesn't happen. Now I see it does. I can see the local News & Observer paper now" (photos supplied by the general public instead of staff photographers since that is the business model now) "Group of Photoshop Photographers Arrested in Mass as Security Threat. No threat Identified but We will think one up!"

Hope I never get stopped when the doctor has me on predesone (Road rage in a pill). I will make news!


Momma, they not only took my Kodachrome away but they took away my right to take photographs.

Nikonians is the Smithsonian of Nikon knowledge. If there is a question they can't answer, I want to see the question.

My Gallery: www.HLDPhotos.com
My Blog : www.HLDPhotos.blogspot.com

One more reason to have a camera with dual card slots. You can format the card storing jpg images, to humor the officer, and keep the raw files.

(Now I realized the original post was nearly 4 years ago.)

Best regads, Antero

Well, at the risk of drawing a few flames, here's a perspective from the other side (no, not the terrorists - rather, the authorities sheesh )

http://www.janes.com/news/publicsafety/pr/pr080403_1_n.shtml

Note, I've been on both sides of the fence (long story), since my family has a background in industrial and site security since the early 50s. And, of course, I'm a shutter bug. There's something to be learned by both camps...

"Toodle-loo from Covey22!"

-Armando
Nikonians Team
Nikonians News - Fresh Everyday!

The Covey Blog!

My Plan:

Get out of the car.
Get closer to the subject.
Pick the right mid-tone this time.

See My Nikonians Gallery

Thanks for the flip side, Armando. I must say that this experience was a profoundly uncomfortable one for me. I am, by my own experiences and inclinations, very much on the side of our first responders when it comes to looking at issues of this kind, so I did not lightly enter into this confrontation with the hospital cop. Too bad the officer I ran into hadn't read that article as well!

Looking back, I think that my encounter was a combination of personality and paranoia. Security and law enforcement occasionally attracts insecure power-trippers to the job and I think it was my misfortune to interact with one of those individuals. Fortunately, they are in a very small minority. Had this person been willing to enter into a dialogue with me, I think the outcome would have been quite different.

Regards,

Russ

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>Well, at the risk of drawing a few flames, here's a
>perspective from the other side (no, not the terrorists -
>rather, the authorities sheesh )
>
>http://www.janes.com/news/publicsafety/pr/pr080403_1_n.shtml
>
>Note, I've been on both sides of the fence (long story), since
>my family has a background in industrial and site security
>since the early 50s. And, of course, I'm a shutter bug.
>There's something to be learned by both camps...

So what? Buying a car and driving it is legal. Using it in a bank robbery is illegal. Taking a picture of a bank, and walking inside to look at a bank in the normal course of business, including asking questions about how safe theif safe deposit boxes are is legal. Robbing the bank is illegal. Taking picture of the bridge is legal. Trespassing on to a bridge and plant bombs on it is illegal.

We live in a free country. We must be able to do legal things, and not be pressured or made to feel like we are criminal because of our doing legal activities.

The reason the cops even wrote that article in the first place is because they KNOW that these activities are legal and they cannot prosecute people for it. If they could, they would have thrown everybody in jail who merely snap a picture of a building.

We must demand these officers to have better judgment. The fact that they can arrest photographer and/or shoot them is precisely why we must demand them to have better judgement.

Disclaimer: I've lived and worked in other parts of the world where personal freedoms are regularly curtailed as part of the local government's remit. So I definitely appreciate the importance of protecting and preserving your rights.

The reason I posted it is to give us shutterbugs, especially folks who have no background in physical site security, an idea of what the authorities would be looking for, assuming they were doing their job properly and professionally. Take a moment to recall - in the past, did YOU fit any of those categories or activities they just described?

Like I said, both camps have something to learn - most police officers may not be photographers (although I know some who are very big enthusiasts), so in the same way, they could benefit from discussion and dialog with shutterbugs. Like why do we need to be up close, or why we need to set up tripods or sit there for up to several hours taking shots of the same landscape or subject.

Bottom-line: people on both sides of the issue can choose to open the dialogue and better understand all aspects of the situation and hopefully come to a more reasonable compromise. Or they can continue to just rant and rail, not bringing the issue to any satisfactory conclusion. Educating oneself about all aspects of the issue is the first step.

"Toodle-loo from Covey22!"

-Armando
Nikonians Team
Nikonians News - Fresh Everyday!

The Covey Blog!

My Plan:

Get out of the car.
Get closer to the subject.
Pick the right mid-tone this time.

See My Nikonians Gallery

I had an interesting experience on the NY subway today. I was riding the 3 train north from my office to 34th St. to go to B&H. After we stopped at 14th St., the conductor came back to our car and seemed to be looking for somebody; he appeared agitated. On his way back up the car, he asked a foreign couple sitting next to me whether they took a photo of him. They said no and he went back to his car. Then he gets on the PA and announces that “the person who took the photo of him at the last stop did not have his permission to take his photo and that if they do it again, he was going to stop the train and call the police to confiscate the camera”.

Fun times in NY . . . .

DamianF4

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

As a practical matter, if you believe this directive, i have a bridge in brooklyn i'm sure you'll be interested in. NYPD are notorious for making up things as they go along and they rarely afford you your "rights." Ask Mrs. Diallo. Her son reached in his pocket to show his ID and three NYPD emptied 39 rounds into him...and they were all acquitted.

K. D. Smith, Jr.
My gallery: http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1334

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>As a practical matter, if you believe this directive, i have
>a bridge in brooklyn i'm sure you'll be interested in. NYPD
>are notorious for making up things as they go along and they
>rarely afford you your "rights." Ask Mrs. Diallo.
>Her son reached in his pocket to show his ID and three NYPD
>emptied 39 rounds into him...and they were all acquitted.

Police officers affording you your rights? Hm, LAPD, need I say more? But, let's keep this on photography.

I was in HK airport and I was taking a picture of my little daughter standing in front of a store while we were waiting to connect to the next flight. The store employee came running out waving her hands saying no photography allowed. I told her I am taking a picture of my daughter and she can ki$$ my a$$. She said I just wanted to let you know ... and walked off. Sometimes you have to stand up for what you believe to be right.

True Dat!

K. D. Smith, Jr.
My gallery: http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1334

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

And you were the guest of the Peoples Republic of China and not the L.A.P.D.

George
My Nikonian Galleries

The PRC would love to have you believe that HK is another country, albeit not rogue like the other territory they lay claim to.

In anycase, when in HK, you do feel a greater sense of autonomy.

Grew up in NY and have taken many photos pre and post 9/11. Just a few years ago I was taking photos in Grand Central Terminal(station but it is a terminal) and a Transit cop stopped me asked for ID etc. When he was done he told me just not to get in the way and no tripod etc, he was polite and professional and yes this was post 9/11. Plus there is nothing wrong with asking permission first. I did this at the Airport in Memphis the Airport police told me where I could go and where I could not another very nice exchange.

To group the whole NYC police department is unfair and wrong.

That said keep this on photography we are not in the business to discuss the policies of any police department and their political implications.

Jim

Share, Learn and Inspire
www.nikonians.org



I will use film until the last roll and last lab are gone. Go Navy

what is being discusse here is photography and how some so-called civil authorities restrict your legal rights to practice the craft. No one here is complaining about being stopped from shooting something that is, officially, off-limits, just the unilateral actions of some officer making up things as he/she goes along. And that is a violation of your constitutional rights.

K. D. Smith, Jr.
My gallery: http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1334

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

"NYPD are notorious for making up things as they go along and they rarely afford you your "rights." Ask Mrs. Diallo. Her son reached in his pocket to show his ID and three NYPD emptied 39 rounds into him...and they were all acquitted."

This is not photography related and is not what this site is about. As one of the Mods again I ask you to keep this photography related and refrain from political points of view.

Kind Regards Jim

Share, Learn and Inspire
www.nikonians.org



I will use film until the last roll and last lab are gone. Go Navy

This is the first sentence in the OP verbiage:

""New York City clarifies photography guidelines for police"


NYPD has appropriately clarified guidelines for officers regarding photography. ..."

Nothing in this thread is about technique or the 'art' of our craft; it is about the basic right to practice the craft;about the basic right to use the nikon that you own. There is nothing unrelated to photography; in fact, what is discussed here is the most basic right to do photography, to use your nikon. There is nothing poltical here and, in terms of my comments, all of my advice has a single root, i.e., if someone tells you to stop photographing...stop...it matters not one iota whether they have the "right" to tell you to stop.

End of story.

K. D. Smith, Jr.
My gallery: http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1334

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Correct the OP posted a document from the NYPD on photography guidelines. But you took it to a level that was not needed. Using events that are clearly not photography related are what is at issue.

If you believe you have no civil rights in the US then that is your opinion and I would say a broad brush to paint an entire country. I have lived all over this country due to Military service and I have not run into anything you state and I have taken pictures just about anywhere I have been and have never had the problems you voice so your sweeping statements are just not true in all cases. But they are your opinions and I respect that but again you bring in events that are more political in nature so they are against the ToU.

Jim

Share, Learn and Inspire
www.nikonians.org



I will use film until the last roll and last lab are gone. Go Navy

This should not be a political discussion (i would strongly agree with that). However, this statement is far afield from the OP. Having been in court numerous times (as part of my job), my advice here is meant only to give commonsense information--don't disobey any police officer at any time, no matter what; it's a crime in and of itself--I believe a misdemeanor in NY, which means you will have a criminal record.

Your experience is yours, but the myriad "failure to comply" or "obstructing governmental administration" (in New York) charges all over this country are exactly what my advice is designed to avoid. No politics, based on 35 years of experience with the legal system in this area. A request to stop photographing, by any police officer must be complied with--no matter what you have with you that is printed. Period.

To advise someone to confront or argue with a police officer based on some printed 'right' is foolish and could be worse than that. Do what you are told and you will have very few problems.

BTW, as a practical matter (my students run into this mistake all the time) a dated policy directive, like the one here is valid when issued and until changed. When it does changes, you are subject to the change, even if you don't know about it (that old ignorance of the law thing). Police are, of course, briefed daily on significant changes in policy. My advice "just comply" would be pretty timeless and useful at any time.

That's my last comment on this matter

K. D. Smith, Jr.
My gallery: http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1334

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Looks like Metro Police in London clarify some points.... hope it gets better now...

http://www.met.police.uk/about/photography.htm

but not much hope I must say...

S, S Brass, S2,S2 BD, F, F Black, FTn, F36, F250 Black, F2 Black, F2A, F2AS Black, F3/T Champagne, F3/T Black, F3P, FG Black, FM2/T, 35TI, 28TI, F4e, F5, D2H, D200... Two Bessa R2S NHS!

Others take pictures, Nikon takes Life with you!

Remember, the World is Analog!!!

My Nikonians Gallery
My Flickr Gallery

Anyone know where one can download a printable copy of this? I'd like to keep it in my bag.

Thanks.

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

having a copy in your bag is useless. whenever an officer tells you to do anything, even it he/she is wrong, if you do not comply with their order you will be arrested on the charge of failure to comply, not matter what you have in your bag.

K. D. Smith, Jr.
My gallery: http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1334

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>"...if you do not comply with their order you will be arrested on the charge of failure to comply, not matter what you have in your bag."

...well, that's a fair point I suppose, but I would still be inclined to carry a copy with me, because if you are arrested you would later be able to demonstrate to a superior desk officer at the precinct, or to a judge at the court, that you had done your best to comply with the laws and guidelines in place. That is, it might be an item of evidence for your defence that you had acted reasonably and that the arresting officer had acted unreasonably in arresting you.

Cheers

Steve (Bedfordshire, England)
My Nikonians Gallery- please visit and leave a comment
A Nikon in the hand is worth two in the bag!

maybe in GB, but 'taint the way it works here. Anything you do or say to that "superior desk officer" will be used against you in a court of law and most judges with a brain will strongly advise you not to say a word in your 'defense' until you have consulted an attorney and acted upon such advise. Oh and this is as real as a heart attack, if you're toting a nikon you are ineligible for an "assigned" attorney or a "public defender." Just as in Britain, you would be entitled to an attorney to defend you, but the state only pays for defense lawyers for indigient people, so you'd be out probably at least a thousand dollars to get even the least expensive attorney to advise you and appear at even one hearing (where he/she might advise you to plead guilty and accept the fine--even of you might have one eventually--or pays even more to support subsequent court appearances.)

What appears above is a practical primer on those that want to excercise their right to photograph in the face of an errant police officer bent on taking that right away--even if he or she really doesn't have that right.

Realstically, the police are the ultimate authority. They are armed and if they injure or kill you in the process of taking you into custody--almost no matter what you really did to resist them, even if only verbally quoting your rights--you are still (at minimum) injured and,at worst, you family has lost you. Even if you prevail eventually, it will cost thousands of dollars and the fact that you insisted on a "right" in the face of the officer doing the job he is sworn to do (arresting and subduing a person he accuses of a "crime") is a powerful argument against you.

I would tell anyone photographing anything in the USA, even the statue of liberty itself, that if a police officer tells you to stop, stop immediately and even put your camera away, quietly and quickly. All this "rights" stuff is high schoolish locker room talk. It doesn't exist.

K. D. Smith, Jr.
My gallery: http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1334

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Thank you for the positive outlook. It sounds like you have had some personal experience.

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

Because of my "real" job, I have decades of experience in this area.

K. D. Smith, Jr.
My gallery: http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1334

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

>Because of my "real" job, I have decades of
>experience in this area.

Please check your PM.

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

what is "PM"?

K. D. Smith, Jr.
My gallery: http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1334

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

PM is an abbrevation for Private Messsage. It is similar to email but between members only. You should receive email notification or you can check for a notification at the top left of the Forums Lobby page.

PM is often used to continue a discussion offline between two members when the threaded discussion would not be appropriate. Sometimes that is because a discussion has run its course. Sometimes it is to clarify and avoid escalating a discussion publicly.

You create a PM by clicking onthe icon at the top right corner of any post - next to the User Profile.

Thanks for taking this one offline.

Eric Bowles
Nikonians Team
My Gallery

Nikonians membership — my most important photographic investment, after the camera

I did get it. I thought it was some kind of mail, but i was initially confused because i do get mail here too...and not offline. thanks for the information.

K. D. Smith, Jr.
My gallery: http://www.nikonians-images.org/galleries/showgallery.php/cat/500/ppuser/1334

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

I think this is a very positive step. As with many things, the pendulum sometimes swings too far, and paranoia over photography is clearly an area where it has swung too far worldwide. It's good to see New York taking a positive and reasonable step forward, probably one that will be welcomed by many in their police department. I doubt most of them enjoyed past policies, whether formal or informal.

Rick Walker

My photos:
GeoVista Photography

Download from our library of Image Doctor podcasts here

Well said, Rick.

It's the momentum of one organization not allowing photos, and then another group hears about it and thinks, "well, if THEY don't allow it, maybe I should allow it either." Pretty soon the whole thing reaches a boiling point. The best thing we can do as photographers is to be civil, and have open communication with people. I we are taking photos of their place of employment, or potentially sensitive locations and someone has a concern, just talk to them and explain yourself. Doesn't always work, but usually goes a long way.

_____________________________
Nikonian Nate

Stop The World, Get The Shot..

My Website

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Visit my Nikonians gallery.

Well, everything went well in New York the other day. Didn't do much street photography to be honest, though. But with five people walking around looking for places to stop and set up engagement portraits (me, two photographer friends, my cousin, and her fiance), we never had an issue. At one point, we came upon some police officers and a police car; I simply walked by them not really focused on them. But my friend went over and asked them if it was okay to shoot in the area, and they courteously smiled, nodded, and said sure, go right ahead.

Hey, did any of you New York nikonians spot us? It was between the hours of 4 and 7PM on Sunday, around the financial district, Southstreet Seaport, and Battery Park. (Ok, I admit I was using a white C*non lens part of the time, but I digress! )

An undeniable paradox: To think that there is any such thing as an absolute rule is at worst naïve, and at best, shortsighted. There is no such thing as an always-true, all context- or situation-salient, absolute rule that always holds true…including this one!

I've done a lot of photography in NYC (pre and post 9/11) and I've never had a problem with police because of it.

I would guess that most of the people approached by a police officer while photographing in NYC are approached because they are obstructing pedestrian traffic or are conducting themselves in a way that may be annoying other people or making them uncomfortable.

Although the new guidelines are good to know, as another poster stated, it's not a good idea to wave the document around in a debate with a police officer who has told you to stop photographing... unless you consider yourself a civil rights activist who is prepared to go to jail to make a point.

It's always better to obey a police officer's orders - you don't know why those orders are given. If they are wrong, there are more effective ways to deal with that than arguing with the officer.

BTW, the guidelines are hardly "new" - they were issued nearly four years ago as was the original posting.

Clyde

Take a look at my nikonians gallery.